**Trigger warning - the link below contains a description of a rape that may be triggering. Read with caution.

In the New York Times last week there was a very brave article entitled "Defriending My Rapist." You can and should read the article for yourself at the Opinionator, but the gist of it is this: at the age of thirteen, the author was brutally raped by four boys from her school. Thirty-eight years later, Facebook recommends she friend one of her rapists (the ringleader). Prodded on by curiosity, she does. To find out more about her reactions to this uniquely 21st century situation, I highly recommend you read the entire piece - I will not be able to do it justice here. Suffice it to say, it is a very insightful piece, and particularly instructive for those of us who respond to rape disclosures. The writer, like many young women, blames herself for her own rape: for wearing a low-cut top, for acting more confident than she felt - "With a child’s logic," she says, "I figured the boys thought I wasn’t a virgin because of my sexy shirt." You can hear the subtle chiding in her voice toward her childhood self, for this lapse in logic, this capitulation to rape culture and victim-blaming. Yet later, when she confronts her rapist via a private Facebook message she repeats a similar theme: "I hope that night has haunted you. I was naïve and a virgin." Even after years of therapy, this woman still feels compelled to point out to her rapists that she was not "experienced," that in fact she was a virgin, in effort to convey to him the seriousness of his crime. That our culture of victim-blaming is so pervasive that even survivors themselves fall victim to it should give us all pause. This is a young woman who was held down and raped by four men. She was a virgin. She screamed.  She was the textbook definition of everything a society thinks of as a "acceptable" victim of rape (you know, aside from the low-cut sparkly top and the fact that she drank some rum), and yet she still blamed herself because she was wearing a shirt that might have made them assume she wasn't a virgin. Indeed, years later, she uses the fact that she was a virgin to emphasize the severity of the crime to her own rapist.

At thirteen years old, this young woman had been exposed to enough of rape culture to think that she had asked for it (and who can blame her, when so many people's reaction would have been to make note of what she was wearing, of whether or not she had been drinking). She knew enough to not want to tell anyone, because she thought she would be shunned at school (and who can blame her, when so many people's reaction is to say "are you sure you want to ruin those boys' lives by accusing them of rape?"). After thirty-eight years, this woman was brave enough to not only confront her rapist but to write about it for the New York Times. But how many more men and women, young and old, may be suffering in silence under these same assumptions?

Stories like these emphasize the need for programs like BARCC's Community Awareness and Prevention Services program. It is not enough for us to respond to disclosures with empathy and compassion, to help men and women who have been raped or assaulted regain control by empowering them to make decisions regarding their own physical and mental health, to provide them with access to valuable services to help them recover and heal. We must also attack the root of the problem: rapists, and a culture that is permissible of rape. We can see from this story (and from articles like this) that the lessons of victim-blaming are learned young, which means we need to start even younger to combat them. Until we as a community rise up against rapists and not their victims, against the crime of rape and not the circumstances under which it occurs, we all but ensure that terrible stories like this continue to happen. If as CAPS volunteers we can empower one young person to stand up to their friends when they are making rape jokes, or to question the messages they are receiving from their peers and the media, or to intervene when they see someone being targeted or harassed, then we will have done our jobs. If enough individuals stand up against rape culture, we can produce a domino effect to someday ensure that crimes like this do not go unpunished, or at least to make sure that the survivors of these crimes do not feel alone or at fault. No one should have to wait thirty-eight years for that kind of validation.

One more note - social networking tools are making encounters like these far more frequent than anytime B.F. (Before Facebook). Sometimes these encounters can turn out to be ultimately empowering, as in the article above. Other times, particularly for those who do not have the benefit of a solid support system, they can simply be triggering and harmful to the emotional well-being of the survivor. How can we be more attuned to these kinds of encounters happening among our family and friends, and supportive and empowering of someone who might be going through something similar to the author (it happens more often than you'd think!)?

Written by: Alison, a CAPS volunteer

It is Girl Scout Cookie time! Countless people, myself included, count down to this season so that we can get our fill of Thin Mints, Samoas, and the many other kinds of cookies.  This year, a girl scout, Taylor, has decided to push a campaign to boycott Girl Scout cookie sales because Girl Scout USA (GSUSA) allows transgender girls into their local chapters.  All of her reasons appear reasonable on the surface such as the safety of girls on overnight trips and the need for all female spaces.  However, her direction and intent are problematic, as she ignorantly assumes that the inclusion of transgender girls will decrease the Girl Scout’s ability to provide a safe space for their members.  Through watching the video, it is clear that Taylor has never been exposed to the idea that there is a difference between sex and gender presentation.  She expresses her discontent at GSUSA’s lack of a policy to require a proof of gender.  However, she doesn’t explore what this proof would look like and who would be in charge of checking it.  Many ‘gender-checking’ solutions could be extremely problematic.  Oftentimes these create a very small box for who qualifies as a girl and forces that decision to be made strictly by biological qualifications.

Let’s have some clarifying definitions before continuing on…
Sex: The biological body parts that are associated with either being male or female
Gender presentation: The way a person displays their actual or perceived gender—whether or not that gender is different from the gender identity traditionally assigned to them at birth based on their sex
Transgender: Umbrella term for people who transition from one gender to another or express themselves outside the gender binary system of male and female (can include changes in name or dress, hormone therapy, and/or surgery)
Cisgender: Individuals who have a match between the gender that was assigned at birth, their sex, and personal gender identity

Throughout the video, Taylor frequently referred to the “transgender boys” that GSUSA is allowing to join the chapters.  These individuals that Taylor is referring to, and who have fought hard to be in the Girl Scouts, are actually transgender girls.  GSUSA handbook reflects that any child K-12 who identifies as a girl and is presented as a girl by their family will be accepted into the Girl Scouts.  There will not be any gender test before being admitted.  Personally, I would like to applaud the GSUSA for having such a progressive policy regarding gender and allowing trans girls access to a safe female-only environment.

Transgender girls are not a danger to their cisgender-peers; they are not boys masquerading as girls in order to sneak into single-sex female groups.  They’re girls living the life with which they identify, despite their biological characteristics.  GSUSA creates a safe space for girls to develop their self-esteem and confidence and it should be available to all girls, regardless of sex at birth.  Other societal institutions and organizations should be more focused on how to be more inclusive of all gender identities so that youth are able to explore their gender identities in a healthy and supported way.

It takes an incredible amount of strength and courage for a trans-child and the family to present as their true gender.  There is backlash from neighbors, peers, friends, the school system and other organizations that the child or family may be a part of.  Taylor indicts transgender individuals as perpetrating violence against cisgender girls but in fact, it is often the transgender child who faces constant bullying, harassment, and assault because of their gender presentation.  It is precisely the attitudes and beliefs of their peers and society at large that enforce a narrow idea of what behaviors and appearances are allowed based on gender that lead to much more violence against transgender youth throughout middle and high school than their cisgender-peers.

• For transgender individuals, the median age of the first sexual abuse experience was 14-15 years of age. (National Online Resource Center on Violence Against Women. 2009)
• Two-thirds of transgender students felt unsafe in school because of their sexual orientation (69%) and how they expressed their gender (65%) (GLSEN, 2009)
• 74% of transgender youth reported being sexually harassed at school, and 90% of transgender youth reported feeling unsafe at school because of their gender expression. (GLSEN. (2001)

In a recent article, one transgender girl, her twin brother, and parents had to move after they were verbally and physically harassed by other children at school.  For her protection, a teacher was assigned to watch her between classes which she found to be incredibly intrusive.  She was constantly excluded from activities and forced to be with the boys rather than the girls on school trips and during activities. 

Rejection, harassment, and bullying can be harmful to any child but the frequency and severity drastically increases when transgender youth are the target.  These acts of violence and constant encroachments on their safety and personal lives have serious consequences for transgender youth.  About 1/3 of transgender youth have attempted suicide as a result of the discrimination (Clements-Nolle, Marx, Katz. 2006). 

There has been an overwhelming outpouring of support for the GSUSA policy and for the transgender girls who have been brave enough to join the troops.  The amount of support is extremely encouraging and inspiring as it shows the growth and the number of transgender individuals and allies who are willing to speak out publicly against transphobic behaviors.  There is still more progress to be made, as the majority of stories about transgender individuals are often sparked from controversy over progressive and empowering policies, like the GSUSA’s, rather than regularly including them in news coverage.

So buy cookies this year in support and knowledge that GSUSA supports and allows ALL girls to join their troops.

I was on a panel for a screening of the MissRepresentation film yesterday at Northeastern.  It was a great film, and I recommend that you watch it if you can find a screening in your area.  The director, Jennifer Siebel Newsom, created the film to explore whether girls and women have better experiences and representation in the US than they did in the past.  She has found that girls and women have not made as much progress as one would be led to believe.  This film does a great job pulling from a variety of sources: advertising, women in politics, TV shows, movies, news coverage, and one-on-one interviews with a variety of men, women, and students in college and high school to get their personal experiences. 

While the information is not new, the film takes the information and presents it in a way that makes it accessible to the new generations.  Many of the films that schools and other organizations have been using are starting to appear dated and therefore the new generations may not absorb as much of the information.  Students will be less likely to relate the information if it references films that are no longer popular or shows that are no longer running.  It is also much easier to state that this is a problem of past generations but not one of today if the materials used are outdated.  The film also uses more technology to show the information.  It is not lecture based with the feeling of a Powerpoint put to film.  It combines visual representations of information with text but uses more recent film techniques to do this.  The film has input from a variety of recognizable men and women who participate in Hollywood, politics, and academia.  It also has input from students in high school and college.  Featuring people that the current generation know can influence how much of the message they absorb, as people are more likely to pay attention to recognizable faces.

At the screening, students were able to identify many of the strengths of the film but also highlighted many areas where it could have been improved.  An improvement that many students discussed was the absence of different types of women.  There were several prominent women of color, such as Condoleezza Rice, Margaret Cho, and Rosario Dawson, but the majority of contributions were from white women.  Additionally, all of the contributors were of a certain socioeconomic class, education level, and physical appearance.  One of my favorite things that former Secretary of State said (paraphrasing of course) was how important it is to have women in the room or else their needs and perspectives won’t be represented.  She gave an example of when Congress was thinking of making changes to Title IX and the importance women played in that discussion in order to block changes. Without women there to tell about how difficult education and sports were before Title IX, it is much easier for men to overlook how important this act is and dismiss it.  Of equal importance, we need perspectives from women of color, from different socioeconomic statuses, and of physical appearances in order to depict a complete picture of the effects of media on women.  We cannot assume that because we have a group of women that it automatically represents the entire population of women across the country. 

One great question that was asked was how to use this knowledge to affect the younger generations through individual actions.  We cannot expect younger generations to have more tolerant and progressive behaviors if we aren’t there to model them.  Youth are going to mimic the culture and norms around them and the cliché “do as I say, not as I do” is not enough to produce behavior change.  We need to step up and model behavior that accepts, respects, and appropriately rewards women and girls’ beliefs, personalities, opinions, and achievements.  We need to actually demonstrate that one’s appearance is not the most important trait of a female.  There are several ways we can do this and include: not commenting on your appearance when passing by a mirror, not commenting on other’s clothing or looks, asking youth why women and girls are wearing heels when they are the main character of an action/rescue move, and changing our conversation topics with girls.  Our own actions and words can influence what a girl thinks is important.  If everyone she meets is focused on how pretty she is or what she wears then that is a message we are sending that is reinforced by the media.  We’re teaching her, and the boys around her, that the most important thing is her appearance.  If, instead, we focus on what she is interested in (books, music, movies, school, hobbies) then we are telling her that her interests and strengths are important and should be listened to and recognized.

Our world is getting increasingly smaller with all the technological changes and innovations.  We are inundated with information each and every day, and it is getting harder and harder for things to break through the clutter to get recognized.  Therefore, media is trying more shocking ads and strategies in order to attract people to their products, sites, and ideas.  This usually means women portrayed in increasingly sexual, degrading, and objectified ways.  Youth are being exposed to these images with little to no intervention.  They are taught how to interpret these images and to recognize why media is portraying women in such horrific ways.  They aren’t told to question what this says about women and girls.  They accept the information and it impacts the way they see the world and the women and girls around them.  This is extremely dangerous.  As a parallel, we do not simply hand car keys to a youth when they are of age to drive.  Teaching about the rules of the road starts when children are small. We learn that red lights mean stop, green lights mean go, and what to do at different traffic signs.  We know what blinkers are for and that there are two pedals.  This information comes from both direct instruction from adults who drive but also from observation.  We don’t expect youth to be able to drive without explicit instruction.  Equally, we should not expect youth to be able to decipher why the media is portraying women and girls in a certain way.  We cannot expect youth to come to their own conclusion that these depictions are degrading and can affect the way society views women and girls. We need to model this, have the conversation, and encourage everyone, especially youth, to question what they see. 

There can be change and we can be a part of it.  I think this film starts the discussion that many people need to have in order to realize the damaging effects the media has on the status of women and how it can and needs to change.

Written by: Stacey

Finally, the FBI’s outdated and problematic definition of rape has been updated for the first time since its original creation in 1929.  This change in language took a painstakingly long 83 years, and comes after many states and police jurisdictions changed their definitions of rape to more inclusive of cases that are reported.  The outdated and limited nature of the 1929 definition is extremely problematic both in theory and practice. 

The original definition of rape is the “carnal knowledge of a female forcibly and against her will”.  Let’s parse that out a bit.  “Carnal knowledge” is defined as the “act of a man having sexual bodily connections with a woman” and can occur if the penis penetrates the vagina, however slight.  “Against her will” is defined as “any instances in which the victim is incapable of giving consent because of her temporary or permanent mental or physical incapacity (or because of her youth)”. It is specified that individuals don’t mature at the same rate and that girls as young as 10 or 12 are capable of giving consent in some situations.  The examples that are written in the FBI Uniform Crime Reporting Handbook on page 26 include instances of gang rape, stranger rape, and the use of weapons by the perpetrators.

Where does one start to point out the numerous problems with this definition and is it possible to do it succinctly?  This definition only recognizes that only females can be raped and that only males can be perpetrators as it specifies that the action must include a penis penetrating a vagina.  Therefore it excludes male and transgender survivors.  It also does not recognize that females and transgender people can be perpetrators.  This definition excludes the intentional use of legal substances, such as alcohol, to rape someone.  It stipulates that some girls aged 10-12 are able to give consent, despite the fact that research on child development does not support that.  Additionally, the FBI has a very limited definition of how sex can occur against a woman’s will specifying that there has to be a level of physical force.  This idea is further cemented in the examples of rape the FBI provides as they all have an element of excessive force or a weapon.  The examples that the FBI provides (gang rape, stranger rape, and use of a weapon) represent the small minority of incidents of rape.  Because of all these errors, the FBI misses many survivors of rape when conducting national studies.  Even if states or police jurisdictions define rape more liberally they are only allowed to report the instances of rape that fit into the FBI definition.  As a result, the FBI seriously undercounts the instances of rape as CDC estimates over one million occurred in 2010 but FBI only reported approximately 84,000.

The new definition is more inclusive and states that rape is “penetration, no matter how slight, of the vagina or anus with any body part or object, or oral penetration by a sex organ of another person, without the consent of the victim.”  Obviously this definition has come a long way from the previous definition and has a lot of positive changes.  However, there are still several problems with it as well. 

First off, if a male or transgender person is forced to have penile-vaginal sex it is still not explicitly rape.  It only recognizes that men can be raped by other men.  This language still focuses on the male as the perpetrator (which is most common) rather than acknowledging that a woman is capable of raping a man as well.  Males have various barriers to reporting rape, including that they are supposed to want sex all the time and that they should be able to defend themselves, and this definition reinforces these ideas but excluding the possibility of penile-vaginal rape by a woman.  Therefore, the statistics will still not be reflective of all the survivors of rape nationwide. 

Its improvements are numerous.  It now includes penetration of the vagina, anus or mouth as counts of rape.  This allows for many more people - females, males, and transgendered - to be counted.  The definition now includes instances where the survivor was incapacitated - whether due to alcohol or drugs - and can not legally give consent.  It also includes the possibility of being raped by an object or a body part other than a penis.  This is an important distinction as it removes some of the assumptions of how rape is inherently a male-female penis-vagina crime.  It removes the necessity of force and turns rather to a lack of consent.  This removes the stipulation of physical force or a weapon in order to be classified as rape.  This is more reflective of the majority of rapes as perpetrators are typically known to the survivor and do not need to use extreme physical force or a weapon. 

The new definition will make statistical nationwide reports about rape to be more accurate and reflective of what is actually happening.  This can lead to increased financial support for rape crisis centers and other organizations that work with survivors or policy dealing with rape.  I don’t believe it should be the final definition of rape as it still excludes some cases but it is far more inclusive than the previous one.

Written by: Stacey

Sexual violence (SV) affects each survivor differently and recovery is pending on a variety of factors: support network, education about SV, therapy, connection to friends and family, activities that are equally distracting and rewarding, reporting and the ensuing investigation and case and others that are specific to each individual.  It is impossible to tell a survivor how long it is going to take to recover and there is no specific road or path that they can take to get there.  It’s unique to each person as they try to regain trust in the world and the people around them.  Each day can be a step forward or a step backward.  It can be a long, grueling, frustrating, and emotional journey.

It can be difficult to know how to respond to friend’s disclosure of sexual assault.  Many people think that it’s best to simply ignore the situation and that the survivor will heal faster if the assault is never mentioned.  However, put this theory in a different context: what if someone close to you died or you lost the job you’ve held for the past ten years?  Would life be easier for you if you didn’t talk about it?  Would the hurt and emotional trauma be easier to handle if no one discussed this with you?  I am not comparing sexual violence to losing a job or a loved one.  It is however a traumatic event, just as the other two are.  And most people need to discuss or acknowledge the trauma that has occurred in order to accept it and start on a path to recovery. 

So how should someone respond?  Unfortunately, there isn’t a magical phrase or action you can do to miraculously heal the situation.  The beautiful and, sometimes, difficult, thing about people is that we all respond differently to similar situations.  Therefore what can work for one survivor may not work for another survivor.

What is important is to keep in mind is that this person is your friend.  You have probably seen her or him in a variety of different emotional states and social settings.  Therefore, you can base your responses and behaviors off of these past experiences.  Does your friend typically like to talk about things straight on or in a more roundabout way?  Perhaps it would be better if there was food to be used as an excuse for not immediately responding to a question or statement.  Other options for putting the survivor more at ease about disclosing could include taking a walk, putting on music, or engaging in some other activity at the same time.  Sometimes it can be easier to talk about the sexual violence when it is not the central focus of the conversation but rather just one element of it. 

The best thing you can do is to be supportive of your friend.  Disclosing can be an extremely difficult thing to do, and she/he will typically only tell you if they feel they can absolutely trust you.  Make sure that your questions are pertinent to what you can do to help your friend and what she/he needs rather than requesting for more details about the assault and why she/he engaged in whatever actions beforehand.  It’s okay to fumble a bit when deciding what to say-that’s normal but make sure that what you’re saying is nonjudgmental.  Be sure that you are effectively communicating that the assault was not her/his fault and that you are there to support in any way necessary. 

It’s important to let survivors make their own choices and to support the ones they make.  As previously mentioned, responses to sexual violence can vary widely. Therefore, be prepared to give your friend options about what she/he can do.  An example would be asking your friend if she/he wanted to go to the hospital to get medical treatment and a forensic exam, only medical treatment, or not go to the hospital at all.  There are so many decisions that need to be made and the only one who can make the best decisions is the survivor.  You can be there to lay out what options exist and to discuss how each one might impact the survivor.  But you have to let your friend make those decisions and support that choice.  And that can be difficult sometimes.

While this can be an extremely difficult thing to hear and handle, know that you aren’t alone.  There are so many resources available to help your friend and yourself.  If you’re on a college campus, there are residence life staff, health counselors, and other staff members to assist.  There are many helpful organizations in the community as well, including BARCC.  Oftentimes, these organizations are great at referring to a better place if they are unable to fit your needs or questions.  So don’t be afraid to reach out and ask for help because it’s what we’re here for! 

*If you are interested in learning more in depth information about how to respond to disclosures then contact BARCC (engagements@barcc.org) and ask about the different trainings and workshops we do!*

Written by: Stacey